The difference between a dialect and language (generally speaking) seems a
rather vexed question, thanks perhaps to the sometimes inexact definitions
created for linguistics in the 19th century.
For example, why is Provencal considered a French dialect, when it shows an
independent line of descent from Latin?
On the other hand, why are Swedish, Norwegian and Danish considered
languages, when they are mutually intelligible to their native speakers?
The only explanation I can find is that the difference lies in politics.
I.e. Provencal speakers are found within a political entity whose standard
language is French, and is seen (unlike Basque or Breton) to be close enough
to be considered a dialectical variant. Likewise, Swedish, Danish and
Norwegian, while close enough to be appear (to an outsider) dialectical
variants, are the standard languages of independent political entities.
(For the Scandinavian(ist)s on the list, I base my comments on my personal
experience and conversations while working for a Danish oil company on a
Swedish vessel with a Norwegian catering crew.)
Likewise, is Friesian, normally considered to be the closest relative of
English, a Dutch or German dialect? I've never heard of it as an English
dialect, although to my ear it sounds much more like English than either
Dutch or German.
The problem arises when there is no standard. The politically-inspired
promotion of languages such as Irish and more recently Welsh have run into
the problem of which dialect to base the standard language on. In Wales, it
has fallen mainly on the southern dialect, with its greater population and
more political clout, rather than the northern variety which is spoken by
more native (first language) speakers.
So, in conclusion, there seems no hard and fast rule over what constitutes a
dialect as opposed to a language. In normal usage, a dialect is considered a
variant of a standard language, without being too precise over the exact
relationship. So, what would Burushaski a dialect of?
Cheers
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: Gerry Reinhart-Waller <waluk@...>
To: Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>; <cybalist@egroups.com>;
<phoNet@egroups.com>
Sent: Monday, 17 April, 2000 9:09 AM
Subject: [cybalist] Example: Burushaski
> I know I've mentioned Burushaski before. And I actually discovered one
> of the last Burushaski speakers who lives in Texas. My question to the
> group is reasonably simple: why is Burushaski, that extraordinary
> language in the Karakoram Mountains, considered to be a language rather
> than a dialect?
>
> Also, in case anyone is interested, I have access to speakers of
> Lawrencian, Haverhillian, and Lowellian from the Merrimack Valley.
> Please let me know if I can help out.
>
> Gerry
> --
>
> Gerald Reinhart
> Independent Scholar
> (650) 321-7378
> waluk@...
> http://www.alekseevmanuscript.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get your money connected @ OnMoney.com - the first Web site that lets
> you see and manage all of your finances all in one place.
> http://click.egroups.com/1/3012/0/_/2431/_/955934048/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>